Glass Onion, a Knives Out Story
Discussion
It has been mentioned briefly in the Netflix thread, but just wanted to give a short review of this in here seeing as it was supposed to be NF's tentpole offering for the festive season and supposedly owes them over half a billion dollars in terms of rights purchase and salaries for Rian Johnson and Daniel Craig before the cost of the film itself is included.
Considering the money at stake I thought it was not nearly good enough. It was supposed to be a murder-mystery yet the most obvious suspect turned out to be the villain all along and the plot really pivoted around a deception that, once it was revealed, meant the rest of the story was pretty pointless action.
Johnson got lucky with Knives Out, which was largely a word-of-mouth success. It was quirky and subverted the murder mystery genre, but Glass Onion is gimmicky and just style over substance. The actors concerned all did their best with the material and gave good performances (special mention to Dave Bautista who doesn't get the credit for the range he has - his character here was as far removed from his role in Bladerunner 2049 as you could get), but the story was typical Johnson at his worst - thin and trying to be clever when it wasn't. For example - he tried to make an issue of it being set during the pandemic, but there's a reason the rest of the entertainment industry has actively avoided this unless it it was pivotal to the plot (which it absolutely wasn't here) because it will date a product terribly and ensure it is treated as disposable fluff rather than an enduring classic.
Oh, and a dishonourable mention to the VFX - some of the CGI location inserts looked worse than the back-projections they used in the 1960's.
There's going to be two more of these apparently, but based on this outing the goodwill achieved by the first film is already being stretched.
PS. Probably featured the last ever screen appearance of Angela Lansbury.
Considering the money at stake I thought it was not nearly good enough. It was supposed to be a murder-mystery yet the most obvious suspect turned out to be the villain all along and the plot really pivoted around a deception that, once it was revealed, meant the rest of the story was pretty pointless action.
Johnson got lucky with Knives Out, which was largely a word-of-mouth success. It was quirky and subverted the murder mystery genre, but Glass Onion is gimmicky and just style over substance. The actors concerned all did their best with the material and gave good performances (special mention to Dave Bautista who doesn't get the credit for the range he has - his character here was as far removed from his role in Bladerunner 2049 as you could get), but the story was typical Johnson at his worst - thin and trying to be clever when it wasn't. For example - he tried to make an issue of it being set during the pandemic, but there's a reason the rest of the entertainment industry has actively avoided this unless it it was pivotal to the plot (which it absolutely wasn't here) because it will date a product terribly and ensure it is treated as disposable fluff rather than an enduring classic.
Oh, and a dishonourable mention to the VFX - some of the CGI location inserts looked worse than the back-projections they used in the 1960's.
There's going to be two more of these apparently, but based on this outing the goodwill achieved by the first film is already being stretched.
PS. Probably featured the last ever screen appearance of Angela Lansbury.
Edited by Evercross on Tuesday 3rd January 14:35
Aunty Pasty said:
Almost everyone seemed to be an unlikeable asshole...
Without giving too much away, there is a redemption story somewhere in there and it could have been the main point of the movie, but it turns out just to be another box-tick in Johnson's 'throw everything at it, quantity rather than quality and depth' approach to storytelling.Aunty Pasty said:
Just wondering whether it was worth persisting with.
It isn't a complete waste of time, but if you felt compelled enough to quit half-way through I would state you're not going to feel any satisfying payback for returning to it.Watched this last night, wasn't convinced I'd enjoy it, but never one to turn down Kate Hudson in a bikini 
I gave it a go.
It was... alright...
If I was the person at Netflix who paid half a billion for the rights I'd be a little nervous, I'm not sure this is as big a franchise as they think it will be.
I gave it a go.It was... alright...
If I was the person at Netflix who paid half a billion for the rights I'd be a little nervous, I'm not sure this is as big a franchise as they think it will be.
Interesting responses. We watched this first over Christmas, then the original last night. I preferred the "indie" feel of the original; my wife preferred the "take the fun bits and ramp them up" of the newer one. We both guessed the culprits before halfway in each film.
Overall: both good enough fun, was our opinion. First one more serious; second one gave some genuine chuckles at background characters' unspoken acting (e.g. eye rolls; shrugs; grins. Many well timed if noticed.)
Overall: both good enough fun, was our opinion. First one more serious; second one gave some genuine chuckles at background characters' unspoken acting (e.g. eye rolls; shrugs; grins. Many well timed if noticed.)
Much prefer the first film, but Glass Onion was ok. Very good film technically but the script was terrible and it’s almost like they didn’t know how to end the film so it just fizzled out.
We watched the original film the night after and I had forgotten how much I loved it - it’s the superior ‘who dun it’ film. Plus it has Ana de Armas so it was always going to win out.
Did find it interesting that it is now 2 films in the same franchise where Daniel Craig has acted alongside actors who were in 2 different Bond films with him.
We watched the original film the night after and I had forgotten how much I loved it - it’s the superior ‘who dun it’ film. Plus it has Ana de Armas so it was always going to win out.
Did find it interesting that it is now 2 films in the same franchise where Daniel Craig has acted alongside actors who were in 2 different Bond films with him.
I thought it was poor.
This review pretty much sums up my thoughts; it doesn't mention the ridiculous sequence of events with the napkin at the end but covers a lot of the issues I had.
https://filmcolossus.com/glass-onion-bad-writing
This review pretty much sums up my thoughts; it doesn't mention the ridiculous sequence of events with the napkin at the end but covers a lot of the issues I had.
https://filmcolossus.com/glass-onion-bad-writing
gregs656 said:
This review pretty much sums up my thoughts; it doesn't mention the ridiculous sequence of events with the napkin at the end but covers a lot of the issues I had.
https://filmcolossus.com/glass-onion-bad-writing
That's a pretty on-the-nail summary for me.https://filmcolossus.com/glass-onion-bad-writing
Watched the first one with Mrs L, it was OK-ish.
She was the driver behind watching Glass Onion, I thought it was a load of tosh. Daniel Craig arsing about in a daft voice, presumably coining it in as best he can post-Bond but without lowering himself to Marvel levels.
DC has perhaps seen de Niro and Pacino doing garbage and thought, why not? I guess scripts like Defiance don't come round too often.
She was the driver behind watching Glass Onion, I thought it was a load of tosh. Daniel Craig arsing about in a daft voice, presumably coining it in as best he can post-Bond but without lowering himself to Marvel levels.
DC has perhaps seen de Niro and Pacino doing garbage and thought, why not? I guess scripts like Defiance don't come round too often.
Mezzanine said:
I enjoyed it. It’s just a piece of fun in the vain of Murder She Wrote.
The first film was obviously better, as is any film with Ana de Armas in it.
I think Craig is having a ball playing the character and I find him very enjoyable.
Same. I really didn’t like the horrendously saturated colour and over-stylised visuals early on but once it got going I enjoyed it. Just a bit of fun, why’s everyone so po-faced? Agree about the half a billion though, that’s just absurd, it’s just a film ffs.The first film was obviously better, as is any film with Ana de Armas in it.
I think Craig is having a ball playing the character and I find him very enjoyable.
I made the same point to the wife about the mask bulls
t. It had no bearing on any point of the film, so why bother.
Definitely preferred the first one and Murder Mystery though.
I thought it was ok. Norton was well cast although he is becoming typecast. When I first saw him (without knowing the cast) I said I was glad it was him because he plays that character so well.
Kate Hudson looked awesome, although the wife thought she acted terribly. But we also weren't sure if that was for effect?
t. It had no bearing on any point of the film, so why bother.Definitely preferred the first one and Murder Mystery though.
I thought it was ok. Norton was well cast although he is becoming typecast. When I first saw him (without knowing the cast) I said I was glad it was him because he plays that character so well.
Kate Hudson looked awesome, although the wife thought she acted terribly. But we also weren't sure if that was for effect?
DaveGrohl said:
Just a bit of fun, why’s everyone so po-faced? Agree about the half a billion though, that’s just absurd, it’s just a film ffs.
You answered your own question there.remedy said:
I made the same point to the wife about the mask bullst. It had no bearing on any point of the film, so why bother?
I read a comment somewhere that the whole Covid rigmarole was necessary to set-up why the Mona Lisa was on holiday, but IMO that whole bit of the film was completely unnecessary, as I think the legal case and subsequent explosion was enough to draw attention to the villain of the piece, the idea that he'd be remembered as the person who destroyed a masterpiece was IMO bullst. It had no bearing on any point of the film, so why bother?t, and in the real world it would have been covered up, as the Louvre was never going to admit to having let a billionaire take temporary charge of their reason to exist.That bit of the story was Johnson having a 'ain't I clever' w
k to himself. The constant cuts to that MacGuffin were supposed to add tension but instead telegraphed what was going to happen to it. As someone else has said - boringly predictable.The film would have been smarter and tighter without it.
Edited by Evercross on Tuesday 3rd January 19:31
Gassing Station | TV, Film, Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff